PC Minutes 07-17-2012Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2012
4. Parcel C is subject to a $13,533.31 sewer and water connection fee at the time the property
connects to sewer and/or water. The connection fee shall be subject to 6% per year interest
beginning November 14, 2005.
5. Parcel D is subject to a $54,268.55 sewer and water connection fee at the time the property
connects to sewer and/or water. The connection fee shall be subject to 6% per year interest
beginning November 14, 2005.
6. Parcels C and D are subject to the Sanitary Sewer Hookup Fee and the Watermain Hookup Fee at
the time of connection to the utility at the rates in effect at that time.
7. The property is being subdivided and is subject to SWMP fees. However, at this time there are
too many unknown variables to accurately determine these fees. These fees will be calculated
and collected when a development plan is submitted to the City.
8. Upon approval of the Metes and Bounds Subdivision, the applicant shall pay a GIS fee in the
amount of $45 ($25 for the plat plus 2 parcels at $10/parcel).
9. The existing Lot C paid park fees with the building permit. Future development on Lots C and D
will require that park fees be paid at the rate enforced at the time of development approval.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD-R) AMENDMENTS: REQUEST TO
AMEND THE FOLLOWING RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS:
CHANHASSEN HILLS, HIDDEN VALLEY, NORTH BAY, SPRINGFIELD ADDITION,
AUTUMN RIDGE, LYNMORE ADDITION, THE PRESERVE, TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE
AND TROTTERS RIDGE. PLANNING CASE 2012-04-5.
Generous: This is group five. Thank you Mr. Chairman and commissioners. This is the fifth round of
Planned Unit Developments that we’re reviewing. This is actually the largest group that we have with 9
th
subdivisions involved. These items will be going forward to City Council on August 13. As we pointed
out before the City’s been working on these projects for over a year trying to get things straighten up.
These developments were approved and the design standards were incorporated as a part of the
development contracts or development plans for the project. They were rezoned to planned unit
development residential, however none of those standards were included in the zoning ordinance. What
we’re trying to do is take those standards and putting in the zoning ordinance so as people go forward and
develop their property or use them they’ll have the standards in the zoning document. Like I said a
st
neighborhood meeting was held on June 21 at the Chanhassen Recreation Center. Approximately 30
people showed up to this one so that was our biggest group. Meeting notices for that neighborhood
meeting as well as the public hearing was sent out to all the property owners. We found out also through
this process that some of the homes may not meet the standard. However we’re not trying to make them
go in and remove anything or build anything. We just want to know, them to know in the future that
these are the standards. As we told people that, when people called in for the standards we often had to
run down into the city’s basement to find out what was actually approved for the project so we’re trying
to clarify that and put it in one location so that not only the City but anyone who wants the information
can find it. And as part of this process we’re not trying to up zone any of the properties so. As I said
there’s 9 developments included as part of this. These were all in southern Chanhassen or south of
Highway 5. They are Autumn Ridge, Trotters Ridge, Lynmore Addition, Townhomes at Creekside,
Preserve at Bluff Creek, Chanhassen Hills, Springfield, North Bay and Hidden Valley and we’re
19
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2012
reviewing them, we’ll try to bring them individually as part of the public hearing process. Give you the
basic information and then if there’s any discussion that people can have it at that time and then at the end
we’d have a motion for all of them. The first project is Chanhassen Hills. It’s PUD #85-06. It was
approved in 1985. The underlying zoning for this development is Single Family Residential. Again this
is located just off of Waters Edge Drive and Highway 212. It’s all single family detached housing and
again under the PUD there’s unique standards that were used as a part of the original approval and that’s
why we couldn’t rezone them to single family residential. There are 72 single family detached units that
were approved as a part of this project. The minimum lot size is 11,200 square feet. For comparison the
single family residential district the minimum lot size is 15,000 square feet. Minimum lot widths are 80
feet and you’ll see as a part of the plan they’re pretty standard there. In the RSF district it’s 90 feet and
the minimum lot depth is 125 feet which is also what is in the RSF district. Setbacks are similar to the
single family residential districts which are 30 front and rear and 10 sides and hard surface coverage is
25%, which is again what the RSF district would have so it’s the minimum lot requirements that make
this development unique. Staff is recommending approval of the PUD ordinance amending this project.
So with that I’d answer any questions.
Aller: Questions, comments. None. Then we’ll open the public hearing. Seeing no one come forward,
close the public hearing.
Generous: You know I think our neighborhood meeting and that notice really helped because we have
had a few calls for this but no one comes to these meetings. The next development is Hidden Valley. It’s
PUD #85-11. It was also approved in 1985. The underlying zoning for this project is R-4 which is mixed
low density residential district. However it should be noted that as a portion of this there is a church on
the northern tip of this development. In the late 90’s there was an effort to amend the PUD to permit
office and medium density residential uses. As part of the neighborhood meeting we had inadvertently
pulled that information in but it was never approved so we pulled it out as we’re bringing it forward to
you and again we’re not trying to up zone any of these projects. We just want to continue the standards
that were adopted originally so. Again this project is located south of Highway 5. It’s adjacent to Lake
Drive East and it has single family residential housing in it. Pretty standard. On the south end is Rice
Marsh Lake so the hard cover standards within the shoreland district which is just the very bottom of this
project, it’s a 25% lot coverage but as part of the subdivision they also made those lots bigger and so as
you go farther north the lots get a little smaller and so, and that would go up to 30%. However the
minimum lot size in this development is 7,500 square feet. Minimum lot width is 70 feet and the
minimum lot depth are 90 feet so you see they’ve deviated downward from the RSF district, or even the
R-4 district. Front setback is 25 feet and this is one of those developments where they had alternating 5
and 10 foot setback requirements so it’s a 15 foot separation between structures. Rear setbacks are 30
feet and wetland setback is 75 feet which was a standard at the time, and like I said the hard surface
coverage is 25% in the shoreland district and it’s 30% in the non-shoreland district. Now I told you, this
parcel right here has an existing church on it. As part of the amendment in the late 90’s they made church
a permitted use under the PUD. We’re continuing that and so the only permitted use on that property
right now is a church and the standards are 50 foot building setbacks from all sides, and then 25 foot
parking setbacks from Lake Drive, 30 feet from the interior so that would be the back and the side and
then 25 feet from Hidden Court. Staff is recommending approval of the PUD amendment for Hidden
Valley.
Aller: Open the public hearing. Seeing no one come forward, close the public hearing. We’re going to
move onto Lynmore?
Generous: North Bay. I don’t know how this got out of whack but. And this is one that I actually have
to amend the PUD ordinance that you have. PUD 95-01. It was approved in 1995. The underlying
zoning for this development is RLM which is Residential Low and Medium Density district. Part of the
20
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2012
reason for that zoning is that they maintained a large area of common open space which is consistent with
the RLM District. These are zero lot line townhouses so they have smaller lot areas. Again there’s a
large wetland complex in the southwest corner of this property with additional open space in the middle
and around the perimeter. You can see that this development also has a beachlot for residents within the
project. And if you go Reflections on Lake Riley is the development immediately to the west of that and
that’s under construction now. They’re in their second phase so Lakeview Road East has been extended
and now they have a second way into this neighborhood. There are 76 detached townhouses as a part of
this and a beachlot was permitted as part of Conditional Use Permit-99-1. The minimum lot size is 2,600
square feet and that’s just the area immediately around each of the units and then again there’s common
open space. Minimum lot widths are 28 feet and minimum lot depth is 75 feet. I won’t go through all the
setbacks but they’re pretty standard. Interior setbacks are all zero. They can build to the lot line.
However because of fire code there are some setback requirements. Hard surface coverage for this is
50% because this property was guided for high density residential and so that was consistent with the
PUD standards. The individual lots do exceed that 50% but if you look at the project in it’s entirety it’s
under 50% site coverage. Staff is recommending approval of this and if you look at the ordinance on
page 1 under permitted uses, and this is something the City Attorney pointed out to me. We have the
permitted uses in this zone shall be detached townhouses and their ancillary uses. It should say accessory
uses. And then that last sentence if there’s a question as to whether or not a use meets a definition the
planning director shall make that interpretation. We’re deleting that segment of the code. Technically
interpretation is the purview of the Planning Commission as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments so
subject to that change we’re recommending approval of that ordinance amendment. So if there’s any
questions I’d be happy to answer that.
Aller: Any questions? Open the public hearing. And seeing no one come forward, closing the public
hearing and moving forward.
Generous: Springfield. This is PUD-93-06. It was approved in 1993. There’s also PUD-00-03. That’s
the Summerfield Addition which is a small segment in the north central part of this project. The
underlying zoning for this development is Single Family Residential. Again this small area here was the
Summerfield and then the rest of this is Springfield. Separate property owners. This is the old Pruitt
property and they had chickens running into the neighborhood and so everyone was, and staff was happy
when that went away because we were getting, having problems with it.
Aanenson: Getting chickens out of the pool.
Generous: This development is again divided by, for hard surface coverage is divided by land that’s
within the shoreland management district. Has a 25% hard cover. The rest of the development and
basically Springfield Drive is the dividing line between those two areas. Again all single family detached
housing. They do have a private park area within the development right off Springfield Drive and
Summerfield Drive. There are 135 single family houses within the developments and there are some
unique circumstances at Lots 3 and 6 of Block 1 are limited to a 2 car garage and that was part of the
original approval so minimum lot size is 11,000 square feet which was the PUD standard. Minimum lot
width are 90 feet and minimum lot depth is 100 feet. Setbacks are standard 30 front and rear and 10 sides
and Lyman Boulevard because it was an arterial road has a 50 foot setback requirement. Again the 25
and the 30 percent hard cover depending on whether or not they’re in the shoreland district. Summerfield
Addition has 10 single family homes. Lots 2, 3, and 4, Block 2 are limited to 2 car garages because they
were smaller lots and at the time they specified that. Lot requirements again are 11,000 square feet with a
minimum frontage of 90 feet and minimum depth of 100 feet. Lyman Boulevard has a 50 foot setback.
There are two lots that access out of that and they share a common driveway. Front setbacks are 30 feet,
rear are 30 feet and sides are 10 feet. This was a 25% hard cover area and limited to 3 stories and 40
21
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2012
feet, which is a little bit higher than most standards. Staff is recommending approval of the Springfield
and Summerfield development or amendment to the PUD.
Aller: Questions, comments. Open the public hearing. Seeing no one come forward, closing the public
hearing and we move on.
Generous: Autumn Ridge, I don’t even have that one. Now I’ve got two. Autumn Ridge is a townhouse
development. PUD #93-05. It was approved in 1993. The underling zoning for this development is R-8
which is medium density residential. Again this is south of Highway 5 and west of Galpin Boulevard.
It’s just west of the Chanhassen, or what is it? Bluff Creek Elementary School. To the west is the
Chanhassen Nature Preserve which the City actually received this stuff as part of the development for this
property. Again it’s a townhouse development. They do have some twinhomes on the south side but it’s
mostly townhouses and they’ve made them into condominiums on the north end of the project. There are
14 townhouses. A total of 28 units. Those are the twins or twin homes. Two three units which, seven
four units, one six unit and nine eight unit townhouses as a part of this development. The minimum lot
size is 2,250 square feet. Minimum lot width was 30 feet and lot depth is 84 feet. Again this is a zero
setback requirement from the property lot lines but it is, they have perimeter setbacks of 50 feet. Hard
surface coverage is 30% but this included all the wetlands to the west of it as a part of the original
approval so. And the only requirement is that they have a minimum 20 foot driveway length. Staff is
recommending approval, and this one had the right language in it of the PUD amendment. Autumn Ridge
and I’d be happy to answer any questions.
Aller: If there are no questions, open the public hearing. Seeing no one come forward, closing the public
hearing.
Generous: I flipped it over inadvertently. Lynmore Addition. Here we go. PUD #98-01 is approved in
1998. The underlying zoning for this development is single family residential and this property is
adjacent to the tributary for Bluff Creek so there are some unique areas that we were trying to preserve.
It’s right off of Galpin Boulevard at Bridal Creek Circle. And again they’re single family homes and I
believe the last house or this house site came in for a development and there’s one left as a part of this
project. In the future if the property to the north develops there is an access easement that’s provided on
the west end of this, the most northwesterly property there. It’s 6 single family detached housings and lot
requirements are 12,854 square feet but they must average 15,000 square feet and because of the big tails
on the easterly one they didn’t have a problem. Minimum lot width is 90 feet and minimum depth is 125
feet. Setback is 25 feet for the front, except for Lot 6 who had a variance approved to go to 20 feet so
they could have a front porch. That was the existing home on the property when it came in for
development. Side setbacks are 10 feet, rear setback is 30 feet. Like I stated, the Bluff Creek corridor
runs along the northeast and east side of this project so there’s a 40 foot setback requirement from that
and they also are required to show that on their plans so it’s easy for us to enforce and there’s a 30% hard
coverage requirement with this development. Staff is recommending approval of the PUD, and this
ordinance was correct when they sent it to me so no changes on that and I’d be happy to answer any
questions.
Aller: Hearing none we’ll open the public hearing. Seeing no one come forward we’ll close the public
hearing.
Generous: Next is the Preserve at Bluff Creek. This is PUD #06-14. It was approved in 2006. The
underling zoning is RLM which is residential low and medium density district. This is right next to the
subdivision that we looked at, the Metes and Bounds subdivision property. You can see Mills Drive
which is that secondary access point. These are all single family detached houses but they’re on smaller
lots. This is 93 single family homes were approved as a part of this project. The minimum lot size is
22
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2012
8,000 square feet. They have, we have perimeter setbacks are 50 feet and front setback is 25 feet on the
garage side and on corner lots they get a 20 foot setback on the second street frontage. It’s a 5 and 10 foot
setback requirement with the minimum 15 foot separation between buildings and the rear lots, rear
setback is 15,000 square feet. This was a unique development in that we determined what the maximum
site coverage for each lot was and that’s so they can go up to 3,631 square feet. It may be over 40% of
the lot. There’s a wetlands buffer of 16 1/2 feet with our standard 40 foot wetland setback from the buffer
and the Bluff Creek zone goes on the west side of this project down here in I believe we walked that
before. There’s a 40 foot setback from that and all the houses were platted so that they could comply with
that. Staff is recommending approval of the PUD ordinance. We have this one right when we sent it to
you too. So with that I’d be happy to answer any questions and we’re recommending approval.
Aller: Questions? Hearing none, open the public hearing. Seeing no one come forward, closing the
public hearing and we’ll move on.
Generous: Townhomes at Creekside. This is also a townhouse development. It’s PUD #96-02. It was
approved in 1996. The underlying zoning is R-8 which is mixed medium density residential district. It’s
located on Coulter Boulevard and Stone Creek Drive. It’s Andrew Court is actually the access into it
which is a private street. The east branch of Bluff Creek runs along the east side of this property and
Bluff Creek runs through the southern portion of this development. There are a townhouse development.
Private street to access it. There are 25 total townhouses. The minimum lot size is 1,950 square feet.
Minimum lot width is 20.5 feet and minimum lot depth is 91 feet. Interior wise there’s zero setbacks
from the lot development and so because of the private drive they have adequate space for the driveways.
There’s a 30% hard cover over the entire development which includes a large open space. Staff is
recommending approval and this is one where we have to amend the permitted uses. In the staff report it
was correct but in the ordinance there’s a reference if there’s a question as to whether or not use meets the
definition the planning director shall make that interpretation is being removed. With that staff is
recommending approval and be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Aller: Hearing no questions we’ll open the public hearing. Seeing no one come forward we’ll close the
public hearing.
Generous: Trotters Ridge. It’s a single family residential development on Galpin Boulevard. It’s PUD
#93-02. It was approved in 1993. There’s some interesting history on this but I won’t go into it.
Underlying zoning is single family residential district and so they’re all single family detached housing.
There was an existing house within this development on the west side of Bridle Creek Trail just as you
come in and to the north. The Chanhassen Nature Preserve is to the north of this and there’s a trail system
that runs along the north side of this that goes around that whole thing so it’s a nice, pretty nice setup and
then in Galpin Boulevard there’s another trail. You can just see it here. Extensive wetlands within the
project. There is significant topographic changes as part of this. This is an example, early example of our
tree preservation ordinance where we were preserving individual trees and we discovered that that doesn’t
work very well. It makes it very difficult for people to build their houses so we moved away from that
but it was a learning experience for us all. There are 49 single family homes within the project. The
minimum lot size is 11,000 square feet. Minimum lot width is 90 feet and minimum lot depth is 100 feet.
Front setbacks are 25 feet except for Lot 15, Block 2 which was the existing home and that has a 20 foot
setback. Side setbacks are 10 feet. There’s a 30 foot rear setback and the wetland setbacks varied and so
we took what was approved originally and put it into a table. Hard surface coverage is 30% for the entire
development and this is one again where the staff report deleted it but the ordinance that was printed had
that if, under permitted uses if there’s a question as to whether or not a use meets the definition the
planning director shall make that interpretation. We’re deleting that language from the ordinance as we
move it forward. We’ll clean that up for City Council. So we’re recommending approval of the PUD for
Trotters Ridge.
23
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2012
Aller: Hearing no questions, open the public hearing. Seeing no one come forward we’ll close the public
hearing.
Generous: And with that staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approve the attached
ordinances rezoning all the planned unit developments that we’ve presented tonight, with the
modifications as specified to delete either ancillary and change that to accessory or make the
interpretation not the planning director. And adopt the Findings of Fact and Recommendations for each
of the projects. And with that I’d be happy to answer any questions.
Aller: Okay for this is our fifth time around. I don’t think I have any questions. I’m comfortable with
the fact that we have no up zoned. That we are trying to provide individuals with a greater opportunity to
be able to come in and see what the uses are available when they want to do something with their property
so.
Aanenson: I was just going to add too I think at the neighborhood meetings we did…so people wanted
their lot surveys. See what they were so those emailed out so like Bob said I think having people at those
neighborhood meetings was really a chance to make aerial photos or their subdivisions so give them an
opportunity to find their house and ask more specific questions so I think that was a very positive
experience.
Aller: Which is probably why the room isn’t full with people coming forward during public hearings, and
I think that is another good thing that I think planning did was when we split these up it gives us an
opportunity to get out to more people and have them get the opportunity to hear what’s going on with
their property.
Hokkanen: I’d just like to recognize it’s a lot of work and good job.
Aller: So would anyone like take on this motion?
Hokkanen: I’ll try. The Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the attached
ordinance rezoning the Planned Unit Development Residential to incorporate the development standards
for, I’m just going to list them all off. Autumn Ridge, Chanhassen Hills, Hidden Valley, Lynmore
Addition, North Bay, Preserve at Bluff Creek, Springfield and Summerfield Second Addition,
Townhomes at Creekside, Trotters Ridge and adopt the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendations
with the modifications.
Aller: Thank you. Having that.
Thomas: Second her motion.
Aller: Motion and second. Any further discussion?
Hokkanen moved, Thomas seconded that the Planning Commission recommends the City Council
approve the attached ordinance with modifications rezoning the Planned Unit Development
Residential to incorporate the development standards for Autumn Ridge, Chanhassen Hills, Hidden
Valley, Lynmore Addition, North Bay, Preserve at Bluff Creek, Springfield and Summerfield
Second Addition, Townhomes at Creekside, Trotters Ridge and adopt the attached Findings of Fact
and Recommendations.
24
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2012
Generous: Thank you. In the next group we’re actually rezoning some properties to single family
residential. The final.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Thomas noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of
the Planning Commission meeting dated June 19, 2012 as presented.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION UPDATE.
Aanenson: So we did do the PUD’s for the group, must be group 4 that went to the City Council. The
City Council also looked at the PUD for the, there were changes there in the, how we process the
applications regarding Findings of Fact and the public hearings so that was approved. Also the non-
conforming lots. Those are specifically related to the shoreland district and then also sign illumination
and temporary signs. You had approved those before but we kind of grouped those together to go all at
once so those were approved. And then they also did approve the Lakeside beachlot which we appreciate
th
you coming in Lisa so we can get that, so they could enjoy that for the 4. They were very thankful for
that so that’s it for the update.
Aller: Any other business? Motion to adjourn.
Aanenson: Oh, can I give you one other item before you adjourn?
Aller: Sure.
Aanenson: Just kind of ongoing business. Our next regular meeting, which we’ve had the request the last
year was, is National Night Out. The City has a very high participation level in that and actually last year
the, all the department heads went out to neighborhoods and I was down at North Bay one. A couple of
neighborhoods. I went to three neighborhoods so it’s nice. We usually go out with an officer so it’s a
nice opportunity for us to meet too so we will not be having a meeting. I encourage all of you, if you
have a neighborhood get together that you participate in that and things that you hear we’d like to get
feedback on. Concerns or issues or if things are going right or whatever we’d like to hear about that. We
st
do have items for our August 21 meeting. I think the first one on there may not be in. We thought they
were putting some stuff together. There’s some exciting things happening down there but I think they’re
working on something else but we certainly will have a next iteration of the rezonings. And then we do
st
have something, did we have something else in on that that was going to come in for that August 21.
We have something else on that. This went out before it went to press and I don’t have the latest update
on that but there’s something else. We are meeting with some other developments. We will have a
couple other things yet this fall. Then the other thing, oh the Canine Club. That was one before and
st
came off and so that will be back on for the 21, thank you. I knew there was something else. Thank
you. Yeah, they have til Friday but we believe that they’re targeting that date because they want to get
that going before the fall. And I hope you’ve been driving around looking at the Goodwill going up and
Primrose. They had their ground breaking so that’s exciting. Then also we do have that tour planned
th
with the Environmental Commission again and the Park Commission on the 12 so we’re kind of putting
together some ideas. I think some of the things we’re going to look at is the tree preservation area,
wetland, shoreland sort of things. We’re talking about maybe ending up somewhere where we could kind
of maybe roast hotdogs or have a marshmallow roast or something like that. Kind of all get together so
we’ll hopefully have good weather on that night so hopefully we can all attend but if there’s anything that
you have on your agenda that gosh, I’d love to learn more about this or maybe we can take a tour of this.
Certainly we like to visit things we’ve done recently so we try to hit those on our way but then also
provide that educational component like we did last time walking. Can you be with us Kathleen do you
think?
25